You are on page 1of 9

Communicative Language

Teaching
Background
The origins of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) are to be found in the changes in
the British language teaching tradition dating from the late 1960s. Until then !ituational
Language re"resented the ma#or British a""roach to teaching $nglish as a foreign language.
%n !ituational Language Teaching language &as taught b' "racticing basic structures in
meaningful situation(based activities.
British a""lied linguists em"hasi)ed another fundamental dimension of language that &as
inade*uatel' addressed in current a""roaches to language teaching at that time ( the
functional and communicative potential of language. The' sa& the need to focus in
language teaching on communicative "roficienc' rather than on mere master' of structures
+nother im"etus for different a""roaches to foreign language teaching came from changing
educational realities in $uro"e. ,ith the increasing interde"endence of $uro"ean countries
came the need for greater efforts to teach adults the ma#or languages of the $uro"ean
Common -ar.et and the Council of $uro"e a regional organi)ation for cultural and
educational coo"eration. Education was one of the Council of Europe's major areas of
activity. %t s"onsored international conferences on language teaching "ublished monogra"hs
and boo.s about language teaching. The need to articulate and develop alternative
methods of language teaching was considered a high priority.
%n 19/1 a grou" of e0"erts began to investigate the "ossibilit' of develo"ing language courses
on a unit(credit s'stem a s'stem in &hich learning tas.s are bro.en do&n into 1"ortions or
units each of &hich corres"onds to a com"onent of a learner2s needs and is s'stematicall'
related to all the other "ortions1 (van $. and +le0ander 19304 6). The grou" used studies of
the needs of $uro"ean language learners and in "articular a "reliminar' document "re"ared
b' a British linguist 5. +. ,il.ins (19/6) &hich "ro"osed a functional or communicative
definition of language that could serve as a basis for develo"ing communicative s'llabuses for
language teaching. Wilkins's contriution was an analysis of the communicative
meanings that a language learner needs to understand and e!press. "ather than
descrie the core of language through traditional concepts of grammar and vocaulary#
Wilkins attempted to demonstrate the systems of meanings that lay ehind the
communicative uses of language.
The &or. of the Council of $uro"e7 the &ritings of ,il.ins ,iddo&son Candlin
Christo"her Brumfit 8eith 9ohnson and other British a""lied linguists on the theoretical
basis for a communicative or functional a""roach to language teaching7 the ra"id a""lication
of these ideas b' te0tboo. &riters7 and the e*uall' ra"id acce"tance of these ne& "rinci"les b'
British language teaching s"ecialists curriculum develo"ment centers and even governments
gave "rominence nationall' and internationall' to &hat came to be referred to as the
Communicative $pproach# or simply Communicative Language Teaching. (The terms
notional-functional approach and functional approach are also sometimes used.) +lthough the
movement began as a largel' British innovation focusing on alternative conce"tions of a
1
s'llabus since the mid(19/0s the sco"e of Communicative Language Teaching has e0"anded.
Both $merican and British proponents now see it as an approach %and not a method&
that aims to %a& make communicative competence the goal of language teaching and %&
develop procedures for the teaching of the four language skills that acknowledge the
interdependence of language and communication.
:o&att distinguishes bet&een a 1strong1 and a 1&ea.1 version of Communicative Language
Teaching4
There is, in a sense, a 'strong' version of the communicative approach and a 'weak' version.
The weak version which has become more or less standard practice in the last ten years,
stresses the importance of providing learners with opportunities to use their English for
communicative purposes and, characteristically, attempts to integrate such activities into a
wider program of language teaching.... The 'strong' version of communicative teaching, on
the other hand, advances the claim that language is acquired through communication, so that
it is not merely a question of activating an existing but inert knowledge of the language, but of
stimulating the development of the language system itself. f the former could be described as
'learning to use' English, the latter entails 'using English to learn it.' !"#$%& '(#)
;inocchiaro and Brumfit (193<) contrast the ma#or distinctive features of the +udiolingual
-ethod and the Communicative +""roach according to their inter"retation4
$udio'linguale (ethod
Communicative Language Teaching
1. +ttends to structure and form more than
meaning.
-eaning is "aramount.
6. 5emands memori)ation of structure(based
dialogs.
5ialogs if used center around
communicative functions and are not
normall' memori)ed.
<. Language items are not necessaril'
conte0tuali)ed.
Conte0tuali)ation is a basic "remise.
=. Language learning is learning structures
sounds or &ords.
Language learning is learning to
communicate.
>. -aster' or 1over(learning1 is sought. $ffective communication is sought.
6. 5rilling is a central techni*ue. 5rilling ma' occur but "eri"herall'.
/. ?ative(s"ea.er(li.e "ronunciation is
sought.
Com"rehensible "ronunciation is
sought.
3. @rammatical e0"lanation is avoided. +n' device &hich hel"s the learners
is acce"ted A var'ing according to
their age interest etc.
9. Communicative activities onl' come after a
long "rocess of rigid drills and e0ercises
+ttem"ts to communicate ma' be
encouraged from the ver'
beginning.
10. The use of the student2s native language is
forbidden.
9udicious use of native language is
acce"ted &here feasible.
11. Translation is forbidden at earl' levels Translation ma' be used &here
students need or benefit from it.
16. Beading and &riting are
deferred till s"eech is mastered.
Beading and &riting can start from
the first da' if desired.
1<. The target linguistic s'stem &ill be
learned through the overt teaching of the
"atterns of the s'stem.
The target linguistic s'stem &ill be
learned best through the "rocess
of struggling to communicate.
6
1=. Linguistic com"etence is the desired goal. Communicative com"etence is the desired
goal (i.e. the abilit' to use the linguistic
s'stem effectivel' and a""ro"riatel').
1>. Carieties of language are
recogni)ed but not em"hasi)ed.
Linguistic variation is a central conce"t in
materials and methodolog'.
16. The se*uence of units is
determined solel' b' "rinci"les of linguistic
com"le0it'.
!e*uencing is determined b' an'
consideration of content function or meaning
&hich maintains interest.
1/. The teacher controls the learners and
"revents them from doing an'thing that
conflicts &ith the theor'.
Teachers hel" learners in an' &a' that
motivates them to &or. &ith the language.
13. 1Language is habit1 so errors must be
"revented at all costs.
Language is created b' the individual often
through trial and error.
19. +ccurac' in terms of formal correctness
is a "rimar' goal.
;luenc' and acce"table language is the
"rimar' goal4 accurac' is #udged not in the
abstract but in conte0t.
60. !tudents are e0"ected to interact &ith the
language s'stem embodied in machines or
controlled materials
!tudents are e0"ected to interact &ith other
"eo"le either in the flesh through "air and
grou" &or. or in their &ritings.
61. The teacher is e0"ected to s"ecif' the
language that students are to use.
The teacher cannot .no& e0actl' &hat
language the students &ill use.
66. %ntrinsic motivation &ill s"ring from an
interest in the structure of the language.
%ntrinsic motivation &ill s"ring from an
interest in &hat is being communicated b' the
language.
(193<4 91(<)
$pproach
Theory of language
The communicative a""roach in language teaching starts from a theory of language as
communication. The goal of language teaching is to develop &hat :'mes (19/6) referred
to as )communicative competence.1 :'mes coined this term in order to contrast a
communicative vie& of language and Choms.'2s theor' of com"etence. Choms.' held that
linguistic theor' is concerned "rimaril' &ith an ideal s"ea.er(listener in a com"letel'
homogeneous s"eech communit' &ho .no&s its language "erfectl' and is unaffected b' such
grammaticall' irrelevant conditions as memor' limitation distractions shifts of attention and
interest and errors (random or characteristic) in a""l'ing his .no&ledge of the language in
actual "erformance. (Choms.' 196>4 <)
;or Choms.' the focus of linguistic theor' &as to characteri)e the abstract abilities s"ea.ers
"ossess that enable them to "roduce grammaticall' correct sentences in a language. :'mes
held that such a vie& of linguistic theor' &as sterile that linguistic theor' needed to be seen
as "art of a more general theor' incor"orating communication and culture. *ymes's theory of
communicative competence was a definition of what a speaker needs to know in order to
e communicatively competent in a speech community. %n :'mes2s vie& a "erson &ho
ac*uires communicative com"etence ac*uires both .no&ledge and abilit' for language use
&ith res"ect to
1. &hether (and to &hat degree) something is formall' "ossible7
6. &hether (and to &hat degree) something is feasible in virtue of the means of
im"lementation available7
<
<. &hether (and to &hat degree) something is a""ro"riate (ade*uate ha""' successful) in
relation to a conte0t in &hich it is used and evaluated7
=. &hether (and to &hat degree) something is in fact done actuall' "erformed and &hat its
doing entails.
(:'mes 19/64 631)
This theor' of &hat .no&ing a language entails offers a much more com"rehensive vie& than
Choms.'2s vie& of com"etence &hich deals "rimaril' &ith abstract grammatical .no&ledge.
+nother linguistic theor' of communication favored in CLT is :allida'2s functional account
of language use. 1Linguistics ... is concerned... &ith the descri"tion of s"eech acts or te0ts
since onl' through the stud' of language in use are all the functions of language and therefore
all com"onents of meaning brought into focus1 (:allida' 19/04 1=>). %n a number of
influential boo.s and "a"ers :allida' has elaborated a powerful theory of the functions of
language &hich com"lements :'mes2s vie& of communicative com"etence for man' &riters
on CLT (e.g. Brumfit and 9ohnson 19/97 !avignon 193<). :e described (19/>4 11(1/) seven
asic functions that language performs for children learning their first language+
1. the instrumental function4 using language to get things7
6. the regulator' function4 using language to control the behavior of others7
<. the interactional function4 using language to create interaction &ith others7
=. the "ersonal function4 using language to e0"ress "ersonal feelings and meanings7
>. the heuristic function4 using language to learn and to discover7
6. the imaginative function4 using language to create a &orld of the imagination7
/. the re"resentational function4 using language to communicate information.
Learning a second language &as similarl' vie&ed b' "ro"onents of Communicative Language
Teaching as ac*uiring the linguistic means to "erform different .inds of functions.
+t the level of language theor' Communicative Language Teaching has a rich if some&hat
eclectic theoretical base. !ome of the characteristics of this communicative vie& of language
follo&.
1. Language is a s'stem for the e0"ression of meaning.
6. The "rimar' function of language is for interaction and communication.
<. The structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses.
=. The "rimar' units of language are not merel' its grammatical and structural features but
categories of functional and communicative meaning as e0em"lified in discourse.
Theory of learning
%n contrast to the amount that has been &ritten in Communicative Language Teaching
literature about communicative dimensions of language little has been &ritten about learning
theor'. ?either Brumfit and 9ohnson (19/9) nor Little&ood (1931) for e0am"le offers an'
discussion of learning theor'. $lements of an underl'ing learning theor' can be discerned in
some CLT "ractices ho&ever. Dne such element might be described as the communication
"rinci"le4 $ctivities that involve real communication promote learning. + second element
is the tas. "rinci"le4 $ctivities in which language is used for carrying out meaningful
tasks promote learning (9ohnson 1936). + third element is the meaningfulness "rinci"le4
Language that is meaningful to the learner supports the learning process. Learning
=
activities are conse*uentl' selected according to ho& &ell the' engage the learner in
meaningful and authentic language use (rather than merel' mechanical "ractice of language
"atterns). These "rinci"les &e suggest can be inferred from CLT "ractices (e.g. Little(&ood
19317 9ohnson 1936). The' address the conditions needed to "romote second language
learning rather than the "rocesses of language ac*uisition.
-ore recent accounts of Communicative Language Teaching ho&ever have attem"ted to
describe theories of language learning "rocesses that are com"atible &ith the communicative
a""roach. !avignon (193<) surve's second language ac*uisition research as a source for
learning theories and considers the role of linguistic social cognitive and individual
variables in language ac*uisition. Dther theorists (e.g. !te"hen 8rashen &ho is not directl'
associated &ith Communicative Language Teaching) have develo"ed theories cited as
compatile with the principles of CLT. ,rashen sees ac-uisition as the asic process
involved in developing language proficiency and distinguishes this process from
learning. +c*uisition refers to the unconscious develo"ment of the target language s'stem as
a result of using the language for real communication. Learning is the conscious
re"resentation of grammatical .no&ledge that has resulted from instruction and it cannot lead
to ac*uisition. %t is the ac*uired s'stem that &e call u"on to create utterances during
s"ontaneous language use. The learned s'stem can serve onl' as a monitor of the out"ut of the
ac*uired s'stem. 8rashen and other second language ac*uisition theorists t'"icall' stress that
language learning comes about through using language communicativel' rather than through
"racticing language s.ills.
9ohnson (193=) and Little&ood (193=) consider an alternative learning theor' that the' also
see as com"atible &ith CLT(a s.ill(learning model of learning. +ccording to this theor' the
ac*uisition of communicative com"etence in a language is an e0am"le of s.ill develo"ment.
This involves both a cognitive and a behavioral as"ect4
The cognitive aspect involves the internalisation of plans for creating appropriate behaviour.
*or language use, these plans derive mainly from the language system + they include
grammatical rules, procedures for selecting vocabulary, and social conventions governing
speech. The behavioural aspect involves the automation of these plans so that they can be
converted into fluent performance in real time. This occurs mainly through practice in con-
verting plans into performance. !,ittlewood "#$%& (%)
This theor' thus encourages an em"hasis on "ractice as a &a' of develo"ing communicative
s.ills.
.esign
-b.ectives
Eie"ho (1931) discusses the follo&ing levels of ob#ectives in a communicative a""roach4
1. an integrative and content level (language as a means of e0"ression)
6. a linguistic and instrumental level (language as a semiotic s'stem and an ob#ect of
learning)7
<. an affective level of inter"ersonal relationshi"s and conduct (language as a means of
e0"ressing values and #udgments about oneself and others)7
=. a level of individual learning needs (remedial learning based on error anal'sis)7
>. a general educational level of e0tra(linguistic goals (language learning &ithin the school
curriculum).
>
(Eie"ho 19314 3)
These are "ro"osed as general ojectives a""licable to an' teaching situation. Earticular
ob#ectives for CLT cannot be defined be'ond this level of s"ecification since such an
a""roach assumes that language teaching &ill reflect the "articular needs of the target
learners. These needs ma' be in the domains of reading &riting listening or s"ea.ing each
of &hich can be a""roached from a communicative "ers"ective. Curriculum or instructional
ob#ectives for a "articular course &ould reflect s"ecific as"ects of communicative com"etence
according to the learner2s "roficienc' level and communicative needs.
The syllabus
5iscussions of the nature of the s'llabus have been central in Communicative Language
Teaching. ,e have seen that one of the first s'llabus models to be "ro"osed &as described as
a notional s'llabus (,il.ins 19/6) &hich s"ecified the semantic(grammatical categories (e.g.
fre*uenc' motion location) and the categories of communicative function that learners need
to e0"ress. The Council of Europe e!panded and developed this into a syllaus that
included descriptions of the ojectives of foreign language courses for European adults#
the situations in which they might typically need to use a foreign language %e.g.# travel#
usiness&# the topics they might need to talk aout %e.g.# personal identification#
education# shopping&# the functions they needed language for %e.g.# descriing something#
re-uesting information# e!pressing agreement and disagreement&# the notions made use
of in communication %e.g.# time# fre-uency# duration&# as well as the vocaulary and
grammar needed. The result was pulished as Threshold Level English (van $. and +le0(
ander 1930) and &as an attem"t to s"ecif' &hat &as needed in order to be able to achieve a
reasonable degree of communicative "roficienc' in a foreign language including the
language items needed to reali)e this 1threshold level.1
Types of learning and teaching activities
The range of e!ercise types and activities compatile with a communicative approach is
unlimited# provided that such e!ercises enale learners to attain the communicative
ojectives of the curriculum# engage learners in communication# and re-uire the use of
such communicative processes as information sharing# negotiation of meaning# and
interaction. Classroom activities are often designed to focus on com"leting tas.s that are
mediated through language or involve negotiation of information and information sharing.
Learner roles
The emphasis in Communicative Language Teaching on the processes of
communication# rather than mastery of
Teacher roles
!everal roles are assumed for teachers in Communicative Language Teaching the im"ortance
of "articular roles being determined b' the vie& of CLT ado"ted. Breen and Candlin describe
teacher roles in the follo&ing terms4
6
The teacher has two main roles: the first role is to facilitate the communication process
between all participants in the classroom, and between these participants and the various
activities and texts. The second role is to act as an independent participant within the
learning-teaching group. The latter role is closely related to the ob.ectives of the first role
and arises from it. These roles imply a set of secondary roles for the teacher/ first, as an
organi0er of resources and as a resource himself, second as a guide within the classroom
procedures and activities.... 1 third role for the teacher is that of researcher and learner, with
much to contribute in terms of appropriate knowledge and abilities, actual and observed
experience of the nature of learning and organi0ational capacities. !"#$2& ##)
Dther roles assumed for teachers are needs anal'st counselor and grou" "rocess manager.
?$$5! +?+LF!T
The CLT teacher assumes a res"onsibilit' for determining and res"onding to learner language
needs. This ma' be done informall' and "ersonall' through one(to(one sessions &ith students
in &hich the teacher tal.s through such issues as the student2s "erce"tion of his or her learning
st'le learning assets and learning goals. %t ma' be done formall' through administering a
needs assessment instrument such as those e0em"lified in !avignon (193<). T'"icall' such
formal assessments contain items that attem"t to determine an individual2s motivation for
stud'ing the language. ;or e0am"le students might res"ond on a >("oint scale !strongly
agree to strongly disagree) to statements li.e the follo&ing.
% &ant to stud' $nglish because...
1. % thin. it &ill someda' be useful in getting a good #ob.
6. it &ill hel" me better understand $nglish(s"ea.ing "eo"le and their &a' of life.
<. one needs a good .no&ledge of $nglish to gain other "eo"le2s res"ect.
=. it &ill allo& me to meet and converse &ith interesting "eo"le.
>. % need it for m' #ob.
6. it &ill enable me to thin. and behave li.e $nglish(s"ea.ing "eo"le.
Dn the basis of such needs assessments teachers are e0"ected to "lan grou" and individual
instruction that res"onds to the learners2 needs.
CDU?!$LDB
+nother role assumed b' several CLT a""roaches is that of counselor similar to the &a' this
role is defined in Communit' Language Learning. %n this role the teacher(counselor is
e0"ected to e0em"lif' an effective communicator see.ing to ma0imi)e the meshing of
s"ea.er intention and hearer inter"retation through the use of "ara"hrase confirmation and
feedbac..
@BDUE EBDC$!! -+?+@$B
CLT "rocedures often re*uire teachers to ac*uire less teacher(centered classroom management
s.ills. %t is the teacher2s res"onsibilit' to organi)e the classroom as a setting for
communication and communicative activities. @uidelines for classroom "ractice (e.g.
Little&ood 19317 ;in(occhiaro and Brumfit 193<) suggest that during an activit' the teacher
monitors encourages and su""resses the inclination to su""l' ga"s in le0is grammar and
strateg' but notes such ga"s for later commentar' and communicative "ractice. +t the
conclusion of grou" activities the teacher leads in the debriefing of the activit' "ointing out
/
alternatives
and e0tensions and assisting grou"s in self(correction discussion. Critics have "ointed out
ho&ever that non(native teachers ma' feel less than comfortable about such "rocedures
&ithout s"ecial training.
The focus on fluenc' and com"rehensibilit' in Communicative Language Teaching ma'
cause an0iet' among teachers accustomed to seeing error su""ression and correction as the
ma#or instructional res"onsibilit' and &ho see their "rimar' function as "re"aring learners to
ta.e standardi)ed or other .inds of tests. + continuing teacher concern has been the "ossible
deleterious effect in "air or grou" &or. of im"erfect modeling and student error. +lthough this
issue is far from resolved it is interesting to note that recent research findings suggest that
1data contradicts the notion that other learners are not good conversational "artners because
the' can2t "rovide accurate in"ut &hen it is solicited1 (Eorter 193<).
The role of instructional materials
+ &ide variet' of materials have been used to su""ort communicative a""roaches to language
teaching. Unli.e some contem"orar' methodologies such as Communit' Language Learning
"ractitioners of Communicative Language Teaching vie& materials as a &a' of influencing
the *ualit' of classroom interaction and language use. -aterials thus have the "rimar' role of
"romoting communicative language use. ,e &ill consider three .inds of materials currentl'
used in CLT and label these te0t(based tas.(based and realia.
TE/T'B$0E. ($TE"1$L0
There are numerous te!tooks designed to direct and su""ort Communicative Language
Teaching. Their tables of contents sometimes suggest a .ind of grading and se*uencing of
language "ractice not unli.e those found in structurall' organi)ed te0ts. !ome of these are in
fact &ritten around a largel' structural s'llabus &ith slight reformatting to #ustif' their claims
to be based on a communicative a""roach. Dthers ho&ever loo. ver' different from "revious
language teaching te0ts. -orro& and 9ohnson2s 3ommunicate (19/9) for e0am"le has none
of the usual dialogues drills or sentence "atterns and uses visual cues ta"ed cues "ictures
and sentence fragments to initiate conversation. ,atc'n(9ones2s 4air 5ork (1931) consists of
t&o different te0ts for "air &or. each containing different information needed to enact role
"la's and carr' out other "air activities. Te0ts &ritten to su""ort the -ala'(sian English
,anguage 6yllabus (19/>) li.e&ise re"resent a de"arture from traditional te0tboo. modes. +
t'"ical lesson consists of a theme (e.g. rela'ing information) a tas. anal'sis for thematic
develo"ment (e.g. understanding the message as.ing *uestions to obtain clarification as.ing
for more information ta.ing notes ordering and "resenting information) a "ractice situation
descri"tion (e.g. 1+ caller as.s to see 'our manager. :e does not have an a""ointment.
@ather the necessar' information from him and rela' the message to 'our manager.1) a
stimulus "resentation (in the "receding case the beginning of an office conversation scri"ted
and on ta"e) com"rehension *uestions (e.g. 1,h' is the caller in the officeG1) and
"ara"hrase e0ercises.
T$0,'B$0E. ($TE"1$L0
+ variet' of games role "la's simulations and tas.(based communication activities have
been "re"ared to su""ort Communicative Language Teaching classes. These t'"icall' are in
the form of one(of(a(.ind items4 e0ercise handboo.s cue cards activit' cards "air(
communication "ractice materials and student(interaction "ractice boo.lets. %n "air(
communication materials there are t'"icall' t&o sets of material for a "air of students each
3
set containing different .inds of information. !ometimes the information is com"lementar'
and "artners must fit their res"ective "arts of the 1#igsa&1 into a com"osite &hole. Dthers
assume different role relationshi"s for the "artners (e.g. an intervie&er and an intervie&ee).
!till others "rovide drills and "ractice material in interactional formats.
"E$L1$
-an' "ro"onents of Communicative Language Teaching have advocated the use of
1authentic1 1from(life1 materials in the classroom. These might include language(based
realia such as signs maga)ines advertisements and ne&s"a"ers or gra"hic and visual
sources around &hich communicative activities can he built such as ma"s "ictures s'mbols
gra"hs and charts. 5ifferent .inds of ob#ects can be used to su""ort communicative e0ercises
such as a "lastic model to assemble from directions.
Conclusion
Communicative Language Teaching is est considered an approach rather than a method.
Thus although a reasonable degree of theoretical consistenc' can be discerned at the levels of
language and learning theor' at the levels of design and "rocedure there is much greater
room for individual interpretation and variation than most methods permit. %t could be
that one version among the various "ro"osals for s'llabus models e0ercise t'"es and
classroom activities ma' gain &ider a""roval in the future giving Communicative Language
Teaching a status similar to other teaching methods. Dn the other hand divergent
inter"retations might lead to homogeneous subgrou"s.
Communicative Language Teaching a""eared at a time &hen British language teaching &as
read' for a "aradigm shift. !ituational Language Teaching &as no longer felt to reflect a
methodolog' a""ro"riate for the seventies and be'ond. CLT appealed to those who sought a
more humanistic approach to teaching# one in which the interactive processes of
communication received priority. The ra"id ado"tion and im"lementation of the
communicative a""roach also resulted from the fact that it *uic.l' assumed the status of
orthodo0' in British language teaching circles receiving the sanction and su""ort of leading
British a""lied linguists language s"ecialists "ublishers as &ell as institutions such as the
British Council (Bichards 193>).
?o& that the initial &ave of enthusiasm has "assed ho&ever some of the claims of CLT are
being loo.ed at more criticall' (!&an 193>). The adoption of a communicative approach
raises important issues for teacher training# materials development# and testing 'and
evaluation. Huestions that have been raised include &hether a communicative a""roach can
be a""lied at all levels in a language "rogram &hether it is e*uall' suited to $!L and $;L
situations &hether it re*uires e0isting grammar(based s'llabuses to be abandoned or merel'
revised ho& such an a""roach can be evaluated ho& suitable it is for non(native teachers
and ho& it can be ado"ted in situations &here students must continue to ta.e grammar(based
tests. These .inds of *uestions &ill doubtless re*uire attention if the communicative
movement in language teaching continues to gain momentum in the future.
9

You might also like